Jesus came in the flesh and/or changed to flesh

This topic contains 2,119 replies, has 17 voices, and was last updated by  NickHassan 1 year, 7 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #359269
     kerwin 
    Participant
    • Topics started 144
    • Total replies 17,364

    This thread is a continuation of part of a conversation between Mike and me in the Who is the Word thread.

    Miike wrote in response to my earlier words:

    Quote
    Kerwin, if God chose to cause Michael the archangel to be conceived in the womb of a human woman tomorrow, could we later say about Michael:

    1. He was turned into flesh? YES or NO?
    2. He became flesh? YES or NO?
    3. He came in the flesh? YES or NO?
    4. He came in the likeness of sinful flesh? YES or NO?
    5. He partook in flesh? YES or NO?
    6. He was made in the likeness of a human being? YES or NO?
    7. He was transformed into flesh? YES or NO?
    8. He was changed into a human being? YES or NO?
    9. He had two different “beginnings”? YES or NO?

    The only HONEST answer to all 9 questions is “YES”. So there is no contradiction in me believing that Jesus both “came in” and was “turned into” flesh.

    So according to you it is honest to say that a woman both came in a dress and was transformed into a dress.

    or

    You believe it is honest to say both a creature transformed into a woman and her dress and came in a dress.

    That is what I call nonsense.

    #359276
     Wakeup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 386
    • Total replies 13,732

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 04 2013,12:27)
    This thread is a continuation of part of a conversation between Mike and me in the Who is the Word thread.

    Miike wrote in response to my earlier words:

    Quote
    Kerwin, if God chose to cause Michael the archangel to be conceived in the womb of a human woman tomorrow, could we later say about Michael:

    1.  He was turned into flesh?  YES or NO?
    2.  He became flesh?  YES or NO?
    3.  He came in the flesh?  YES or NO?
    4.  He came in the likeness of sinful flesh?  YES or NO?
    5.  He partook in flesh?  YES or NO?
    6.  He was made in the likeness of a human being?  YES or NO?
    7.  He was transformed into flesh?  YES or NO?
    8.  He was changed into a human being?  YES or NO?
    9.  He had two different “beginnings”?  YES or NO?

    The only HONEST answer to all 9 questions is “YES”.  So there is no contradiction in me believing that Jesus both “came in” and was “turned into” flesh.

    So according to you it is honest to say that a woman both came in a dress and was transformed into a dress.

    or

    You believe it is honest to say both a creature transformed into a woman and her dress and came in a dress.

    That is what I call nonsense.


    Kerwin.

    The Word was made,made, made.flesh.

    From *flesh to flesh* as you say it is.
    This alone is a strange, and contradicting iterpretation.

    I say from spirit to flesh.Made from one thing to another thing.

    wakeup.

    #359287
     kerwin 
    Participant
    • Topics started 144
    • Total replies 17,364

    Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 04 2013,09:51)

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 04 2013,12:27)
    This thread is a continuation of part of a conversation between Mike and me in the Who is the Word thread.

    Miike wrote in response to my earlier words:

    Quote
    Kerwin, if God chose to cause Michael the archangel to be conceived in the womb of a human woman tomorrow, could we later say about Michael:

    1.  He was turned into flesh?  YES or NO?
    2.  He became flesh?  YES or NO?
    3.  He came in the flesh?  YES or NO?
    4.  He came in the likeness of sinful flesh?  YES or NO?
    5.  He partook in flesh?  YES or NO?
    6.  He was made in the likeness of a human being?  YES or NO?
    7.  He was transformed into flesh?  YES or NO?
    8.  He was changed into a human being?  YES or NO?
    9.  He had two different “beginnings”?  YES or NO?

    The only HONEST answer to all 9 questions is “YES”.  So there is no contradiction in me believing that Jesus both “came in” and was “turned into” flesh.

    So according to you it is honest to say that a woman both came in a dress and was transformed into a dress.

    or

    You believe it is honest to say both a creature transformed into a woman and her dress and came in a dress.

    That is what I call nonsense.


    Kerwin.

    The Word was made,made, made.flesh.

    From *flesh to flesh* as you say it is.
    This alone is a strange, and contradicting iterpretation.

    I say from spirit to flesh.Made from one thing to another thing.

    wakeup.


    Wakeup,

    Mike believe in a body composed of spirit. The transformation he advocates is that both the body and soul of the archangel Michael was transformed into the body and soul of the human Jesus.

    His error here is refusing to believe something can be made in more than one way. This sets up the internal conflict within his own doctrine that he is unable to see.

    It is easy enough for him to resolve without even changing his basic teachings though it does give my words some ground.

    #359550
     journey42 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 3,039

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 04 2013,22:46)
    [/quote]

    kerwin,Oct. wrote:


    Quote
    Mike,

    What you say John 1:14 says is not what it literally says. What you are saying with your meaning is that a creature called the word was made into a human being by transformation.  I disagree.


    Kerwin,

    I brought this over from the other post.  This is my take.

    First of all, the Word is not a creature.  It is spirit.
    The Word was always inside God from everlasting.
    But there comes a time in the beginning (when God starts creating) that he brings forth his word out of himself and gives it a shape and a job to do,
    And God tells the Word, do this and do that, and the Word obeys.  God is still in control of his word.  He gives the orders.
    Now the fact that this Word is now sitting beside God causes some confusion.
    Is there one or two of them?
    for God said  
    Genesis 1:26   And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…

    and …
    Isaiah 45:18   For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

    So we have what looks like a contradiction from an outsiders point of view, but we know that God cannot contradict himself, so we have to work it out and find the answer.
    For the trinitarians believe that Christ and God are one and the same, and we say no, there are two.

    Then we learn later in John, when explaining the WORD to us;

    John 1:3   “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made”.

    So God is showing us how important his WORD is.  He creates with his Word, and we find out exactly what his word is;

    Psalms 33:6   By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.

    So obvious, the Word of God is his command.  His will. Whatever he speaks.
    And because God brought his Word out of himself, and sat it beside him and made it the express image of himself, like a clone, and is controlling his word, tells us that he didn't lie when he said by himself he created everything, because the Word is his coming out of himself, only now is next to him…..reserved for transforming.  

    ONLY NOW THE WORD TRANSFORMS
    John 1:14   And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

    So, now, God's Word, that he brought forth out of himself, his own clone (image) that was sitting next to him containing all his spiritual genes (attributes),
    has now been transformed into flesh inside Mary's womb.
    Not God himself transformed, but his Word that he set aside next to him transformed,
    now takes on a flesh body and has an identity, the Man Jesus Christ.  Now there are two.
    And this makes Christ now, the only begotten Son of God having his Fathers spiritual makeup.
    He is now a new creation, from spirit to flesh which was purposed at the beginning of all creation to be a saviour to the world under his father's direction.

    Colossians 1:15   Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

    Colossians 1:18   And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

    John 17:5   And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

    And that glory that Jesus had with God before the world was, was when he was the Word of God before his transformation,
    and not the man Jesus Christ.

    So God transformed his image (his word that was beside him), turned it to flesh, and gave him his own mind, to make his own decisions, choosing whether to obey or not, but was found faithful to the end, obeying that Word in him, and communicating to his Father constantly, to show us that many things can be accomplished in the flesh if we live according to the spirit and follow his example by pure devotion to our Father.

    All the glory and power to our Lord Jesus Christ who is worthy,
    now sitting at the right hand of God as his faithful Son.  
    And now there are two in heaven, with God always in charge, but the Son will return to govern here on earth for a thousand years with his own authority and power given to him by the Father for he is trustworthy to run all of God's affairs,
    and God can have a little rest knowing his Son will accomplish his purpose and have all ready when he hands the kingdom back to father after his work is finished.

    #359569
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 76
    • Total replies 24,269

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 03 2013,19:27)
    This thread is a continuation of part of a conversation between Mike and me in the Who is the Word thread.

    Miike wrote in response to my earlier words:

    Quote
    Kerwin, if God chose to cause Michael the archangel to be conceived in the womb of a human woman tomorrow, could we later say about Michael:

    1.  He was turned into flesh?  YES or NO?
    2.  He became flesh?  YES or NO?
    3.  He came in the flesh?  YES or NO?
    4.  He came in the likeness of sinful flesh?  YES or NO?
    5.  He partook in flesh?  YES or NO?
    6.  He was made in the likeness of a human being?  YES or NO?
    7.  He was transformed into flesh?  YES or NO?
    8.  He was changed into a human being?  YES or NO?
    9.  He had two different “beginnings”?  YES or NO?

    The only HONEST answer to all 9 questions is “YES”.  So there is no contradiction in me believing that Jesus both “came in” and was “turned into” flesh.

    So according to you it is honest to say that a woman both came in a dress and was transformed into a dress.

    or

    You believe it is honest to say both a creature transformed into a woman and her dress and came in a dress.

    That is what I call nonsense.


    Kerwin,

    Your “dress” analogy is useless, because it doesn't fit the discussion – which is about whether or not God could cause a spirit being to be born again as a flesh being.

    I have listed an analogy concerning Michael the archangel, and have given you a list of things that either can or can't be said about that being.

    Please list each number, with a YES or a NO beside it. In other words, don't DIVERT the discussion with an analogy that isn't even close to what we're talking about – just so you don't have to answer the nine points I made.

    I want to hear from your own mouth how some or all of those things absolutely COULDN'T be said about a spirit being that God caused to be born again from a human womb.

    If you cannot show us any of them that absolutely could not be said in this scenario, then your point is null and void, and needs no further discussion.

    #359570
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 76
    • Total replies 24,269

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    First of all, the Word is not a creature.  It is spirit.


    Angels are also spirit.  Are they creations?

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    The Word was always inside God from everlasting.


    The same could be said about every single thing in existence today.  All things originally came out from God.  What other choice is there, if God was at one time the ONLY thing there was?

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    But there comes a time in the beginning (when God starts creating) that he brings forth his word out of himself and gives it a shape and a job to do,


    So at this point, the Word is actually an individual BEING, separate from God Himself, right?  Therefore, the Word is a new CREATION that God brought forth.

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    And God tells the Word, do this and do that, and the Word obeys.  God is still in control of his word.  He gives the orders.

    So God transformed his image (his word that was beside him), turned it to flesh, and gave him his own mind, to make his own decisions, choosing whether to obey or not……..


    These two don't align, journey.  If the Word was obeying God before the world began, then he must have had his own mind even back then.

    There is more from your post I could address, but these should give us some things to discuss for the time being.

    I will ask you what I've been asking Wakeup in another thread:

    Did God Himself actually change and become flesh?  If the answer is “NO”, then the Word who was with God couldn't have actually BEEN God Himself.  And that means the Word was a separate entity who was brought out from God, and therefore God's first creation.

    Also, let me remind you all of Tertullian's perfectly logical words:  He who creates is one, and he THROUGH WHOM the thing is created is another.

    Keeping that in mind, there is no contradiction to be found in the fact that God, ALONE AND BY HIMSELF, created all things THROUGH His firstborn Son, the Word.

    And it also makes sense that the one THROUGH WHOM God created all things is “ANOTHER”……… ie: “Not God Himself”.

    #359571
     mikeboll64 
    Participant
    • Topics started 76
    • Total replies 24,269

    Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 03 2013,21:51)
    Kerwin,

    The Word was made, made, made, flesh.

    From *flesh to flesh* as you say it is.
    This alone is a strange, and contradicting interpretation.

    I say from spirit to flesh. Made from one thing to another thing.

    wakeup.


    So simple – yet so brilliantly put. Well done, Wakeup.

    #359573
     942767 
    Participant
    • Topics started 13
    • Total replies 7,570

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 14 2013,03:40)

    Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 03 2013,21:51)
    Kerwin,

    The Word was made, made, made, flesh.

    From *flesh to flesh* as you say it is.
    This alone is a strange, and contradicting interpretation.

    I say from spirit to flesh. Made from one thing to another thing.

    wakeup.


    So simple – yet so brilliantly put.  Well done, Wakeup.


    Hi Mike and Wakeup:

    So, when did this take place? Was it when Jesus was conceived of the Holy Ghost in the womb of the virgin Mary? Or just what are you talking about from Word to Flesh?

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    #359578
     Wakeup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 386
    • Total replies 13,732

    Quote (942767 @ Oct. 14 2013,07:43)

    Quote (mikeboll64 @ Oct. 14 2013,03:40)

    Quote (Wakeup @ Oct. 03 2013,21:51)
    Kerwin,

    The Word was made, made, made, flesh.

    From *flesh to flesh* as you say it is.
    This alone is a strange, and contradicting interpretation.

    I say from spirit to flesh. Made from one thing to another thing.

    wakeup.


    So simple – yet so brilliantly put.  Well done, Wakeup.


    Hi Mike and Wakeup:

    So, when did this take place?  Was it when Jesus was conceived of the Holy Ghost in the womb of the virgin Mary?  Or just what are you talking about from Word to Flesh?

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty.

    Quote
    So, when did this take place? Was it when Jesus was conceived of the Holy Ghost in the womb of the virgin Mary? Or just what are you talking about from Word to Flesh?

    .

    In the BEGINNING was the word.
    *BEGINNING* because that's when the Word *BEGINS* To create.

    And the *Word was God*.
    Was God because he was still inside God.

    And the Word was *with God*.
    *With God*, because this is when God brought forth his Word from inside him out,and standing next to God as his express image.

    What ever God wants done; his image did the job.
    After all creation was done,God send him down to earth.

    He was made flesh, by birth,the only begotten of God.
    Born by the *WILL* of God.
    *Now only* is he the Son of God;
    *Now only* is God his father,and his God.
    For he was made as his brethren/the Son of man/the Son of David.

    God and his Word are still one God,for his Word came out of inside God out. He is part of God.
    Without God there is no Word,there is nothing.

    He went back to his Father in heaven,and will come again
    *as the Word of God*. The first and the last,the Alpha and Omega, He who was dead, and yet is alive forevermore.

    Dont get confused as the majority are.
    God did not die;but his Word made flesh died.

    wakeup.

    #359581
     kerwin 
    Participant
    • Topics started 144
    • Total replies 17,364

    Mike,

    Quote
    Your “dress” analogy is useless, because it doesn't fit the discussion – which is about whether or not God could cause a spirit being to be born again as a flesh being.  

    Hardly, as I was careful to word in in order to replace dress with flesh and the creature you claim Jesus is as woman.

    The question is not whether God could but rather whether God did do as you say.

    Never the less this is a test of part of your chosen doctrine.

    Are you claiming that John 1:14 can be translated the Word was conceived in the flesh?

    Quote
    He came in the flesh?  YES or NO?

    No, as according to you he is not coming inside the flesh. Instead you claim he became fully human both flesh and soul and therefore no longer an angel.  I do not even believe that such a creature would be Michael at that point as such a drastic change is a act of creation just like adam was made of the earth and Eve of Adam's rib.  Perhaps if you claim he was not truly human but instead had an angel soul inside a human body.

    Quote
    Please list each number, with a YES or a NO beside it.  In other words, don't DIVERT the discussion with an analogy that isn't even close to what we're talking about – just so you don't have to answer the nine points I made.

    Actually you are diverting this discussion with your questions as I initialized it.  I will judge which I feel fit in with the conversation and are significant. At this point I waiting for you to iron out a seeming conflict in your doctrine.  

    You should reword 1,2, and 7 as I do not believe you hold the creature you claim became Jesus transformed into flesh without a soul.

    Quote

    1.  He was turned into flesh?  YES or NO?
    2.  He became flesh?  YES or NO?

    7.  He was transformed into flesh?  YES or NO?

    My answer is no to all three because the word was not made, become, or be transformed into flesh without a soul.

    three, four, five, and six sound like the answer is yes.

    eight and nine are not even in Scripture and so the answer is no.

    #359582
     kerwin 
    Participant
    • Topics started 144
    • Total replies 17,364

    journey42,

    Your post is long and I have to take time to process it. I do not know if I will be able to answer it.

    #359584
     942767 
    Participant
    • Topics started 13
    • Total replies 7,570

    Hi Wakeup:'

    You say:

    Quote
    He was made flesh, by birth,the only begotten of God.
    Born by the *WILL* of God.
    *Now only* is he the Son of God;
    *Now only* is God his father,and his God.
    For he was made as his brethren/the Son of man/the Son of David.

    So, the Word was made flesh by birth, that is to say when the Word, Jesus, was born of the virgin Mary? And he was not the Son of God as the Word but became the Son of God when he was born of the virgin Mary?

    And you say:

    Quote

    In the BEGINNING was the word.
    *BEGINNING* because that's when the Word *BEGINS* To create.

    Please show me where the scriptures state that the Word begins to create. Thanks.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty

    #359586
     Wakeup 
    Participant
    • Topics started 386
    • Total replies 13,732

    Quote (942767 @ Oct. 14 2013,11:09)
    Hi Wakeup:'

    You say:

    Quote
    He was made flesh, by birth,the only begotten of God.
    Born by the *WILL* of God.
    *Now only* is he the Son of God;
    *Now only* is God his father,and his God.
    For he was made as his brethren/the Son of man/the Son of David.

    So, the Word was made flesh by birth, that is to say when the Word, Jesus, was born of the virgin Mary?  And he was not the Son of God as the Word but became the Son of God when he was born of the virgin Mary?

    And you say:

    Quote

    In the BEGINNING was the word.
    *BEGINNING* because that's when the Word *BEGINS* To create.

    Please show me where the scriptures state that the Word begins to create.  Thanks.

    Love in Christ,
    Marty


    Marty.

    In the beginning was the Word.
    Before the BEGINNING; the word was not used to create.
    Before the beginning the Word was not uttered by God.
    But was in God;but the creation has not commenced.

    wakeup.

    #359587
     journey42 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 3,039

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    First of all, the Word is not a creature.  It is spirit.


    Quote
    Angels are also spirit.  Are they creations?


    Hi Mike, Yes Angels are spirit.  They were created spirit, and are therefore creations
    ….But we are talking about the Word here, the Word of God that came out of God's mouth before it transformed into Jesus, not angels.

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    The Word was always inside God from everlasting.


    Quote
    The same could be said about every single thing in existence today.  
    All things originally came out from God.

     
    Everything was made by God and consists of him, because it's created with his wisdom, but doesn't mean that all came out of him like a replica of him?
    Animals are not a replica of him,
    this is different, he spoke and it was done.
    The only that came out of him was his Word, and we all know that the Word was later transformed into Christ.  
    This is why he is the “only begotten son”.  He has his Father's genes. Spiritual genes, made up of truth, honor, wisdom, righteousness etc, …all the same attributes as his Father, for before he was even Jesus Christ he came out of his Father as the Word,
    nothing else has this title, and nothing else came out of him the same way.  He is like no-other.  He is his real son, of highest majesty.
     

    Lets consider this verse again;
    Psalms 33:6   By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.

    So everything God speaks (his word) comes out of his mouth.  Whether his Word is in him or beside him, it's still his breath because he controls it.
    Man, beast and all things God created had a beginning, so how can this have always been with God?  God is from everlasting with no beginning.  The idea was there, but this is different to his Word which was always in him,
    And the Word was not always beside him, for there came a time when God bought his word out of him and gave it a shape.  This was at the beginning of creation and we know he did this for a purpose.

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    But there comes a time in the beginning (when God starts creating) that he brings forth his word out of himself and gives it a shape and a job to do,


    Quote
    at this point, the Word is actually an individual BEING, separate from God Himself, right?  Therefore, the Word is a new CREATION that God brought forth.


    I could be wrong, but I don't see it as a new creation, for the Word already existed, and just because God brought it out of him and put it next to him means to me he only moved it from one place to another.  
    also another fact to consider is just because God brought his word out of himself and made it to be next to him, does not mean that he does not have the word inside him still?
    For example, when Christ was crucified, who resurrected him?  God did with his Word.  So this shows that it must be in him still, for he rose Christ from the dead with that same Word.
    The idea was there in God's plan even before all creation that he would bring his Word out, for the purpose of transforming it into a new creation which happened when it was made into flesh. Now it's a new creation, because it's gone from spirit to flesh.  A huge change.

    Quote (journey42 @ Oct. 12 2013,20:17)
    And God tells the Word, do this and do that, and the Word obeys.  God is still in control of his word.  He gives the orders. So God transformed his image (his word that was beside him), turned it to flesh, and gave him his own mind, to make his own decisions, choosing whether to obey or not……..


    Quote
    These two don't align, journey.  If the Word was obeying God before the world began, then he must have had his own mind even back then.


    I'm not quite sure how to answer this one, and it's a good point, but I was referring to when the Word became flesh, the man Jesus Christ.  It takes on a whole different challenge.  The Word is no longer spirit but is in a flesh body now with all it's weaknesses like hunger, pain, sorrow, temptation etc. which is why Christ was glorified because he remained as faithful as that same word did in the beginning despite all the hardships he experienced on this earth.

    #359588
     journey42 
    Participant
    • Topics started 79
    • Total replies 3,039

    Quote (kerwin @ Oct. 14 2013,10:57)
    journey42,

    Your post is long and I have to take time to process it.  I do not know if I will be able to answer it.


    That's fine Kerwin.
    It's very hard for me to explain in only a few sentences.
    I was only giving my view and understanding on the subject.
    I have not been following all the conversations on this subject, so I am looking at everything with fresh eyes.

    I will break up replies from now on and do it over several posts.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 2,120 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

© 1999 - 2018 Heaven Net

or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account